荷兰人与蝙蝠的接触,以及病毒交换的潜在风险。

IF 3.8 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
L Begeman, M J M Geschiere, W F de Boer, J M A van den Brand, P L Eblé, J H T C van der Kerkhof, I Keur, P H C Lina, C B E M Reusken, M de Rosa, M J Schillemans, I Schreuder, C M Swaan, K van Zoonen, T Kuiken
{"title":"荷兰人与蝙蝠的接触,以及病毒交换的潜在风险。","authors":"L Begeman, M J M Geschiere, W F de Boer, J M A van den Brand, P L Eblé, J H T C van der Kerkhof, I Keur, P H C Lina, C B E M Reusken, M de Rosa, M J Schillemans, I Schreuder, C M Swaan, K van Zoonen, T Kuiken","doi":"10.1186/s42522-024-00132-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Contacts between people and free-ranging animals have a potential to cause viral disease epidemics when novel viruses are exchanged. The Netherlands has approximately 18 native bat species, of which some generally use buildings for roosting, and has a dense human population. Frequent indirect and direct contacts between bats and humans could thus be expected, however, this has hardly been studied.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To study human-bat contacts, people living in the Netherlands were questioned about the type and frequency of their bat contacts, their bat knowledge and perception of bats. For analyses respondents were grouped into (1) general population, (2) bat contact risk group, and (3) people that live in a house with a roost site for a Common Pipistrelle Bat maternity group. Associations between human-bat contacts and other variables were tested by an ordinal logistic regression model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We show that 85% (226/265) of group 1 reported no contacts, while 11% (28/265) reported indirect, and 4% (11/265) direct contacts with live bats, dead bats or bat products as their closest type of contacts. These contacts occurred mostly less than yearly. Somewhat similarly, the majority, 69% (9/13) of group 3 reported no contacts, and 15% (2/13) reported indirect contacts and 15% (2/13) reported direct contacts. These occurred monthly to less than yearly. In contrast, a minority, 5% (11/227) in group 2 reported no contacts, while 37% (85/227) reported direct bat contacts, mostly yearly, and 38% (86/227) reported bat-related injury, mostly less than yearly, as their closest type of contact. Overall, an increase in knowledge on bats and bat-related diseases was correlated with closer bat contacts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We conclude that even though bats live close to people in the Netherlands, direct contacts between bats, or bat products, and humans are rare in people from the general population, while being common in people involved in bat-related work. Mitigation of human-bat contacts will be most efficient when targeted to specific groups that are likely to have contacts with bats.</p>","PeriodicalId":94348,"journal":{"name":"One health outlook","volume":"7 1","pages":"7"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11829522/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human-bat contacts in the Netherlands, and potential risks for virus exchange.\",\"authors\":\"L Begeman, M J M Geschiere, W F de Boer, J M A van den Brand, P L Eblé, J H T C van der Kerkhof, I Keur, P H C Lina, C B E M Reusken, M de Rosa, M J Schillemans, I Schreuder, C M Swaan, K van Zoonen, T Kuiken\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s42522-024-00132-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Contacts between people and free-ranging animals have a potential to cause viral disease epidemics when novel viruses are exchanged. The Netherlands has approximately 18 native bat species, of which some generally use buildings for roosting, and has a dense human population. Frequent indirect and direct contacts between bats and humans could thus be expected, however, this has hardly been studied.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To study human-bat contacts, people living in the Netherlands were questioned about the type and frequency of their bat contacts, their bat knowledge and perception of bats. For analyses respondents were grouped into (1) general population, (2) bat contact risk group, and (3) people that live in a house with a roost site for a Common Pipistrelle Bat maternity group. Associations between human-bat contacts and other variables were tested by an ordinal logistic regression model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We show that 85% (226/265) of group 1 reported no contacts, while 11% (28/265) reported indirect, and 4% (11/265) direct contacts with live bats, dead bats or bat products as their closest type of contacts. These contacts occurred mostly less than yearly. Somewhat similarly, the majority, 69% (9/13) of group 3 reported no contacts, and 15% (2/13) reported indirect contacts and 15% (2/13) reported direct contacts. These occurred monthly to less than yearly. In contrast, a minority, 5% (11/227) in group 2 reported no contacts, while 37% (85/227) reported direct bat contacts, mostly yearly, and 38% (86/227) reported bat-related injury, mostly less than yearly, as their closest type of contact. Overall, an increase in knowledge on bats and bat-related diseases was correlated with closer bat contacts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We conclude that even though bats live close to people in the Netherlands, direct contacts between bats, or bat products, and humans are rare in people from the general population, while being common in people involved in bat-related work. Mitigation of human-bat contacts will be most efficient when targeted to specific groups that are likely to have contacts with bats.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94348,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"One health outlook\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11829522/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"One health outlook\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42522-024-00132-6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"One health outlook","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42522-024-00132-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人与自由放养动物之间的接触在交换新型病毒时有可能引起病毒性疾病流行。荷兰大约有18种本地蝙蝠,其中一些通常在建筑物中栖息,人口稠密。因此,蝙蝠与人类之间的频繁间接和直接接触是可以预期的,然而,这几乎没有研究过。方法:为了研究人与蝙蝠的接触,调查了荷兰居民与蝙蝠接触的类型和频率,以及他们对蝙蝠的认识和感知。为了进行分析,受访者被分为(1)普通人群,(2)蝙蝠接触风险组,以及(3)居住在有普通Pipistrelle bat母系群体栖息地点的房屋中的人。人-蝙蝠接触与其他变量之间的关联通过有序逻辑回归模型进行检验。结果:第一组85%(226/265)报告无接触,11%(28/265)报告间接接触,4%(11/265)报告直接接触活蝙蝠、死蝙蝠或蝙蝠制品。这些接触大多少于一年一次。有些类似的是,大多数人(69%)(9/13)的第3组报告没有接触,15%(2/13)报告间接接触,15%(2/13)报告直接接触。这种情况每月发生一次,甚至少于每年一次。相比之下,第二组中有5%(11/227)的少数人报告没有接触,而37%(85/227)的人报告直接接触蝙蝠,大多数每年一次,38%(86/227)的人报告与蝙蝠相关的伤害,大多数少于每年一次,作为他们最亲密的接触类型。总体而言,对蝙蝠和蝙蝠相关疾病知识的增加与更密切的蝙蝠接触有关。结论:我们得出的结论是,尽管蝙蝠在荷兰与人类生活得很近,但蝙蝠或蝙蝠产品与人类之间的直接接触在普通人群中很少见,而在从事蝙蝠相关工作的人群中很常见。当针对可能与蝙蝠有接触的特定群体时,减少人与蝙蝠接触将是最有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Human-bat contacts in the Netherlands, and potential risks for virus exchange.

Background: Contacts between people and free-ranging animals have a potential to cause viral disease epidemics when novel viruses are exchanged. The Netherlands has approximately 18 native bat species, of which some generally use buildings for roosting, and has a dense human population. Frequent indirect and direct contacts between bats and humans could thus be expected, however, this has hardly been studied.

Methods: To study human-bat contacts, people living in the Netherlands were questioned about the type and frequency of their bat contacts, their bat knowledge and perception of bats. For analyses respondents were grouped into (1) general population, (2) bat contact risk group, and (3) people that live in a house with a roost site for a Common Pipistrelle Bat maternity group. Associations between human-bat contacts and other variables were tested by an ordinal logistic regression model.

Results: We show that 85% (226/265) of group 1 reported no contacts, while 11% (28/265) reported indirect, and 4% (11/265) direct contacts with live bats, dead bats or bat products as their closest type of contacts. These contacts occurred mostly less than yearly. Somewhat similarly, the majority, 69% (9/13) of group 3 reported no contacts, and 15% (2/13) reported indirect contacts and 15% (2/13) reported direct contacts. These occurred monthly to less than yearly. In contrast, a minority, 5% (11/227) in group 2 reported no contacts, while 37% (85/227) reported direct bat contacts, mostly yearly, and 38% (86/227) reported bat-related injury, mostly less than yearly, as their closest type of contact. Overall, an increase in knowledge on bats and bat-related diseases was correlated with closer bat contacts.

Conclusions: We conclude that even though bats live close to people in the Netherlands, direct contacts between bats, or bat products, and humans are rare in people from the general population, while being common in people involved in bat-related work. Mitigation of human-bat contacts will be most efficient when targeted to specific groups that are likely to have contacts with bats.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信